COMPLAINT FILED: 25.03.2009<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 03rd AUGUST 2009<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> COMPLAINT NO.695/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri. S.N.Lakshmipathy,<br /> S/o Late B.Narasimahaiah,<br /> Aged about 42 years,<br /> #120, 1st Floor, 9th Cross, I Phase,<br /> 80 Feet Road, J.P.Nagar,<br /> Bangalore – 560 078.<br /> <br /> Advocate (G.N.Harish)<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. M/s ICICI Bank Ltd.,<br /> Registered Office at Land Mark, <br /> Race Course Circle,<br /> Vadodara – 390 007,<br /> <br /> Represented by its <br /> Credit Card Manager.<br /> <br /> 2. M/s ICICI Bank Ltd.,<br /> Branch Office Mytree Centre,<br /> # 4/10, Hosur Road,<br /> Bommanahalli,<br /> Bangalore – 560 068.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Represented by its<br /> Credit Card Branch Manager. <br /> <br /> Advocate (V.Suresh)<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> 2. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> 3. OP representative approached the complainant and canvased with regard to the benefits and facilities they are going to offer on credit card. Thus induced him to purchase the credit card. Ultimately, he received one credit card bearing No.4477474456143000. The said card did not contain his signature. Thus he was not in position to use the same. With all that to his utter shock and surprise on 15.01.2009 he received a legal notice from OP, claiming payment of unpaid dues of Rs.29,184=06. Immediately he contacted the OP and told them that he never used the said card and sought for recall of the notice. But all his efforts went in vain. For no fault of his he is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Thus he felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief’s accordingly. <br /> <br /> 4. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to OP, complainant utilized the said credit card in the month of October – 2007, but some how failed to clear the dues. The approach of the complainant is not fair and honest. When complainant himself is the defaulter he cannot allege the deficiency in service. Complainant is devoid of merits. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 5. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 6. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No.1 :- Whether the complainant has proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of<br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No.2 :- If so, whether the complainant is entitled <br /> for the relief now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No.3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 7. We have gone through the pleadings of the both parties, as well as oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative. <br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative in part. <br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 8. It is the case of the complainant that though he was not interested in the credit card of the OP, but some how the representative of the OP rather managed to issue him the credit card promising to provide certain benefits and facilities so also an attractive cash limit. After some days he received credit card it was not bearing his signature as contemplated. Hence he is unable to utilize the same. But to his utter shock and surprise on 15.01.2009 he received a legal notice from OP advocate demanding to pay an unpaid dues of Rs.29,184/-. The copy of the legal notice is produced<br /> <br /> 9. It is further contended by the complainant that he has not utilized the said card, the claim of the OP is unjust, improper and without due application of mind. OP has not extended the helping hand but still made a false claim. The evidence of the complainant appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard his sworn testimony. It is a quality of evidence that is more important than that of the quantity. As against this unimpeachable evidence of the complainant, the defence set out by the OP appears to be defence for defence sake. <br /> <br /> 10. According to OP, complainant utilized the said credit card in the month of October – 2007. For what purpose he utilized and how much amount is paid through the credit card on which date is not known. The documents produced by the OP shows that the said credit card is used for payment of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Premium. The said documents refers to the payment made in the month of December-2007, November-2007 and January-2008. None of the document show that the complainant utilized the said card in the month of October-2007. The defence of the OP as could be seen from the contents of the version and the documents it is self contradictory.<br /> <br /> 11. In addition to that the amount alleged to have been paid towards the Insurance, Interest and Premium is rather meager. Then what is the basis for the OP to claim out standing dues of Rs.29,184/- is not known. The whole of the defence appears to be untenable. <br /> <br /> 12. In view of the discussions made above and also taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the tact that the said credit card does not bear the signature of the complainant, we don’t find force in the defence of the OP. In addition to that to support the defence of OP has not filed the affidavit of the ICICI Insurance Company which received the alleged premium and the interest etc. Under such circumstances the evidence of the OP without there being sufficient corroboration from the Insurance Company rather alone cannot to be believed.<br /> <br /> 13. The Act and deeds of the OP which are arbitrary must have naturally caused both mental agony and financial loss to the complainant that to at no fault of his. Under such circumstances we find complainant is able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP, hence he is entitled for certain relief. Of course the claim of compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- appears to be exorbidant and unreasonable. Bearing in mind the facts and circumstances of the case justice will be met by directing the OP to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/- with litigation cost with these reasons we answer point No.1 and 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following:<br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation costs of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. <br /> <br /> This order is to be complied within 30 days from the date of its communication. <br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 03rd day of August 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> s.n.m.<br />